Music Criticism in France, 1918-1939
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This collection uncovers how music criticism contributed to national and transnational preoccupations and agendas. Music Criticism in France examines the aesthetic battles that animated and informed French musical criticism during the interwar period (1918-1939). Drawing upon a rich corpus of critical writings and archival documents, the book uncovers some of the public debates surrounding classical music in the immediate aftermath of the Great War until the eve of World War II. As such, it provides new insights into the priorities, values and challenges that affected the musical milieu of this war-bound generation. This collection of essays brings together scholars from different areas of musicology and related humanities disciplines; it also draws on different anglophone and francophone intellectual traditions. As well as considering the reception of individual works, the contributors examine key individuals, composer-critic pairings, the composer as critic and technician, the role of influential journals, and music criticism as a pedagogical tool for concert-going and radio audiences. Focusing on the themes of authority, advocacy and legacy, it shows the contribution of principal critics such as Vuillermoz, Vallas, Prunières, Schloezer and Koechlin to shaping our understanding of music in the first half of the twentieth century in France. We see how criticism contributes to national and transnational preoccupations and agendas, which were of considerable importance throughout the interwar period and continue to have relevance today. BARBARA L. KELLY is Director of Research and Professor of Musicology at the Royal Northern College of Music, Manchester. CHRISTOPHER MOORE is Associate Professor of Musicology at the University of Ottawa. Contributors: PHILIPPE CATHÉ, MICHEL DUCHESNEAU, KIMBERLY FRANCIS, JACINTHE HARBEC, BARBARA L. KELLY, PASCAL LÉCROART, CHRISTOPHER MOORE, RACHEL MOORE, JANN PASLER, CAROLINE RAE, DANICK TROTTIER, MARIANNE WHEELDON
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".